Jesse Keating schrieb: > On Friday 05 January 2007 01:55, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> This issue brings up a interesting question: Which board has the power >> to influence and adjust this particular naming scheme in our new >> "merged" world? FESCo or the Fedora Board? > > Ultimately I feel it should be the Fedora board. Nearly the same wording as jeremy two minutes earlier ;-) Well, I can live with that, but could one of the Board members (I'm sure at least Rahul, Jeremy and rdieter will read this mail) bring this issue up in the next Board meeting please? > FESCo is really responsible > for making sure the full repo is there, and the Distribution cabal (hopefully > there will be more than just me) is responsible for taking content from that > repository and creating installable iso sets from it. /me in that case I'm really wondering why I got two rough ACKs from rdieter and gdk when I wrote "the things that the Core cabal did and does (release process, bring the tree in shape for release, plan feature to work on or the next release, ...) somehow need to be done by FESCo then" at https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2006-November/msg00248.html /me more and more feels uncomfortable with the situation and now is even more confused -- its getting more and more unclear who is responsible for what in this whole game. Hopefully we sort this out soon... CU thl -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
